Specifications:This tele extender can be used with fixed focal length lenses 135mm and longer (except the 135mm f/2.8 Softfocus lens), and the EF 70-200 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 70-200 f/4.0L, and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS zoom lenses. Superb optically, it preserves the image quality of the lens it's mounted to and multiplies its focal length 1.4x. Effective aperture is reduced by one f-stop; autofocus is possible on any EOS camera when combined with a lens having an f/4 or faster maximum aperture. The new version II maintains the outstanding optics of the previous version, and adds enhanced weather- resistant construction, and improved anti-reflective surfaces in the barrel.

The price quote above is a rough conversion of GBP to USD. The actual price I paid was £201.50 from Calumet.

To answer a question below the recent edition of EOS magazine had a correction stating that the 1.4EX works with the new 70-200 f/4 IS lens works with all Canon Extenders (the previous edition claimed it didn't).

Conclusion:

Superb accessory. Might not get a great deal of use but for a relatively low(ish) cost your get an extra .4 of a lens.

Jan 23, 2007

chris frankOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 12, 2007Location: United StatesPosts: 0

Review Date: Jan 12, 2007

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9

Pros:

Sounds good, better then 2x

Cons:

Does it work w/ 70-200 F/4 L IS??

The info for both the 1.4x & 2.0x Canon Extenders state that they work w/ F 70-200 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 70-200 f/4.0L, BUT what about the 70-200 f/4.0L IS?? neither review state anything about the f4 w/ IS. I assume it works w/ that lens, but wanted to confirm.
Thanks

Jan 12, 2007

ukcolinOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 12, 2005Location: United KingdomPosts: 0

Review Date: Oct 10, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Superb performance - loss of quality hardly noticeable

Cons:

Restricted compatibility with the range of Canon lenses

Oct 10, 2006

JanPhotoOffline[ X ]

Registered: Feb 27, 2006Location: CanadaPosts: 32

Review Date: Sep 10, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Blasting Quality !!!

Cons:

Nono ....

I am using it with 70-200 /2,8 IS and it's good, really good ...

Sep 10, 2006

LgnAdamsOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: May 27, 2006Location: N/APosts: 219

Review Date: Sep 6, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $280.00
| Rating: 9

Pros:

It gets you closer.

Cons:

One stop light loss, slight loss of contrast.

I've used two of these converters. The first was rented from Rentglass.com and was visibly soft when mounted on my 70-200 2.8, I could tell in the viewfinder. Stop it down to an effective aperture of f/8, though, and it's sharp as can be.

I got lucky on the second, though. It was new from B&H and was sharp as a tack. I shoot it wide open and the images are incredible. Very happy with it.

My advice would be to buy one from a dealer that lets you return it for a different copy until you get a sharp one. NOTE: They also seem to hold their value extremely well, you can see them get sold here and on eBay for about what I paid for one brand new.

Sep 6, 2006

rsleeOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 19, 2005Location: United StatesPosts: 57

Review Date: Jul 27, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $279.00
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Steller performance

Cons:

None

If you are in need for 1.4x, look no further. This is it!

Jul 27, 2006

nputtickOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: May 17, 2004Location: United KingdomPosts: 18

Review Date: Jun 29, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10

Pros:

It works, simple as that. Great build quality and fit. Small size ideal for travelling.

Cons:

None that I can see if used with Canon L lenses. Perhaps a little expensive. Only works with L lenses owing to protruding front element.

I am using this with a 5D full frame dSLR.

My initial test shots suggest that the IQ when used with the 300mm f4 L IS is not noticeably decreased (viewing at 100%). That suggests that the prime lens on its own is outresolving the sensor, and that adding the convertor (which will reduce resolving power), does not reduce the actual total optical resolution below that of the sensor.

With this lens the AF and IS still work perfectly.

It also works well with my 70-200mm f4 L zoom, though I would only use it for part of its range, from about 140 - 200 as marked (so effectively 200 - 280mm) to avoid duplicating focal lengths. There would be litle point in using it at a marked 100mm (effective 140mm) with the convertor, as that
is part of the native range of the lens - why intentionally reduce the aperture and (theoretical) resolution?

Someone below comments on its use with the 100mm f2.8 USM macro. I would point out that it does not fit that lens, as the protruding front element of the convertor will not fit in the lens mount recess of the macro lens - so don't try it!

Jun 29, 2006

incdigitalOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 2, 2005Location: United StatesPosts: 226

Review Date: May 9, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $175.00
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Best 1.4x tele converter for canon L glass, Retains most of the IQ that the lens its mounted on, WeatherProof, L Build

Cons:

none

May 9, 2006

wendycOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: May 29, 2005Location: New ZealandPosts: 6

Review Date: Apr 20, 2006

Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros:

Difference between older and II version?

Cons:

Sorry, can I ask a question please? I can get the older version for a third of the price, is it worth getting it do you think? its not the II, just Canon Extender EF 1.4x.
Thanks in advance
Wendy

Apr 20, 2006

TristanOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 18, 2005Location: United KingdomPosts: 264

Review Date: Apr 15, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Solid as a rock, little or no degradation in image quality. Saved makes your long primes longer :)

Cons:

None.

Great product, does what it says on the tin.

Apr 15, 2006

beerslammer666OfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 12, 2006Location: AustraliaPosts: 0

Review Date: Apr 12, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros:

Cons:

In response to the previous post, you need the Sigma dedicated 1.4x teleconverter with the Sigma 70-200mm.

Apr 12, 2006

tracksphotoOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 21, 2006Location: United StatesPosts: 0

Review Date: Mar 21, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $240.00
| Rating: 8

Pros:

N/A

Cons:

N/A

I just bought this off Ebay and it works fine on my Canon 300mm F/4 lens but will not connect to my Sigma 70 - 200 f2.8 lens.

Should this work on my Sigma lens?

Mar 21, 2006

tracksphotoOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 21, 2006Location: United StatesPosts: 0

Review Date: Mar 21, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $240.00

Pros:

Cons:

I bought a used Canon extender and it works fine on my Canon 300mm f4 lens, but I also have a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lens and it will not connect.

Almost 300 bucks for an extender doesn't thrill me (but the quality does!) Held steady, I can't see a loss of image quality.

Losing the AF on my 100-400 with this extender wasn't a big deal. I tried the "tape trick" on the correct contact points and, OK, the AF was restored ... but the lens was too touchy and "snoop-focused" anyway so ... no gain, some pain.

With the 100mm f/2.8 macro, this thing is wickedly sharp. With the 70-200 and the 100-400, it gives you two lenses that are a real handful to control. Biggest tripod you have is required.

All in all, it's a "must have" accessory in my bag.

Mar 14, 2006

joeyseagerOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 19, 2005Location: United KingdomPosts: 67

Review Date: Mar 1, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Can't fault it for optical quality or mechanical construction. The best available.

Cons:

Limited applicaiton - compatible with only a narrow range of Canon lenses

I only own one lens that I can use this with: the 300mm f/4 L IS lens. The converter degrades the image slightly but this means the images I get from the lens are superb rather than perfect...

This unit is a world apart from lesser third party converters. It is built like a tank and optically it is so well matched to the lenses for which it is designed that the images made with it are up to professional standards.

It's quite expensive but much cheaper than buying an extra lens.

There's been some comment about why it's a 1.4x converter and not a 1.5x converter. The answer is in the maths. 1.4 (to one decimal place) is the square root of 2. A 1.4x converter therefore reduces the area covered in the field of view of the lens by a factor of 2 - or the linear dimensions of the field of view by a factor of 1.4. A 2x converter reduces the area covered in the field of view of the lens by a factor of 4, not 2. There have been some 1.5x teleconverters marketed but I believe these were actually 1.4x converters benefitting from 'creative marketing'.

Mar 1, 2006

coppertopOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 21, 2006Location: United StatesPosts: 1528

Review Date: Feb 16, 2006

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $280.00
| Rating: 10

Pros:

You don't loose any quality.

Cons:

Why couldn't it be a 1.5x

Bought this to use with my Canon 70-200 f4L. Absolutely no reduction in clarity. The AF does get sensative in low light conditions but in average to bright light, no difference.

Never understood why companies built 1.4x and 2x teleconverters. Why not 1.5x and 2x?